I don't know about you, but I kinda prefer having targeted advertising for stuff I'm actually interested in

Not me. Targeted advertising really pisses me off. Well, not the advertising -- all advertising is obnoxious, targeted or not -- but rather the spying that is required in order to do the targeted advertising.

There are already plenty of places that I can get a curated news feed if that's what I want. What I want from Twitter is to see what the people I'm interested in are saying. If, as the Wired article asserts, this is an effort to just change Twitter into a news outlet, then Twitter would no longer be offering anything of value to me.

instead it's tailored for everybody which means include the features that are important so the user doesn't have to figure it out.

"tailored for everybody" is logically identical to "tailored for nobody".

Perhaps what you're missing is that people aren't objecting to the inclusion of the functionality. They're objecting to the manner in which is was incorporated. If this Pocket stuff had been shipped as an add-on, nobody would be complaining.

They replaced their own version of Pocket with this popular adding. No damage done.

Getting a payday is the only explanation for this that makes any sense to me. As to "no damage done" -- I would say "little damage done". However, it's yet another little annoyance in the flood of annoyances over the past few years.

It used to be that I could install Firefox and spend 10 minutes or so installing the extensions that I wanted. Then I was good to go.

Now I install firefox and have to spend at least a half hour going installing more extensions than ever, half of which are to undo the damage Mozilla has done to the browser, as well as having to go through the about:config to disable all of the various tracking "services" and fix the things that I can't find extensions to fix.

This is just the next drip of water in the water torture that Firefox has become.

I could even tolerate all of that if it weren't for the straight-up hostility and disregard for users that Firefox appears to have developed.

It's just sad to see them go down the drain like this. It's like losing an old friend.

Yes, because monetization is inherently antagonistic to users. That should be no surprise. If the problem is money, then perhaps Mozilla would want to consider a less painful and more honest form of monetization: start charging for the browser.

But the main problem with Pocket isn't the monetization. It's that Mozilla is selling out the privacy of its users. Adding insult to injury, it's selling to a commercial, third party company with a blatantly awful privacy policy.

To bring things back around to the topic, though, this is not the problem with the idea of integrating VR. That problem (which Pocket shares) is that Mozilla is intent on spending their purportedly limited resources on adding features of limited value instead of fixing the numerous problems that have been introduced into Firefox over the last several years.

I wouldn't care about whether or not Firefox has VR support in it if there wasn't so much stuff in Firefox that needs to be fixed. Come on, Mozilla, please make the browser work well before you shovel more features into it.

SourceForge hasn't been a reasonable place to host a project for years now, and it hasn't been getting any better. I wouldn't touch SF with a ten foot pole, either to host my projects or to download other projects.

I had already determined that I'm not upgrading from 7 to 10 (although if I still had a Win 8 machine, I'd certainly upgrade from that). For me, Windows 10 doesn't offer even a single compelling reason to bother with it -- while it makes some things (such as the start menu and search) worse.

But when looking over the list of things that 10 deprecates, I am getting tempted to call 10 a downgrade.